Water Board Waits Ruling On Nov. Vote

The Water Board hopes to learn next week whether or not it should obey the Nov. 1 referendum in which Cambridge voted to discontinue fluoridation.

J. Carrell Morris, Gordon McKay Professor of Sanitary Chemistry, said last night that he and the two other members of the Water Board would meet with City Solicitor Richard D. Gerould '24 on a day yet to be determined. Gerould--who was asked for an opinion two days after the refrendum--said last night that "one is in process," but we refused to say what he would recommend.

Nearly four months after voters rejected fluoridation, 16,302 to 15,303, the Water Board has yet to take official action. Fluoride has not been added to the City's water since Feb. 6 because the Water Department ran out of the chemical and was unable to buy it in small quantities.

Cloudy Legal Situation

Two legal factors cloud the fluoridation picture. One is a suit, now pending Middlesex Superior Court, that would force the anti-flouridation forces to disclose the source of the funds they used in heavy Cambridge campaigning.

The other is a decision handed down last November by the state Supreme Court. In a case involving a fluoridation referendum in Newton, the Court ruled that such votes are merely advisory and not binding.

One of the five Cambridge residents who filed the fluoridation suit said last night that the group's strategy was to make "the whole referendum look like a biased piece of work." James M. Dunning '26, director of the Dental Health Services, said that they hoped that the City Council will set aside the results of the referendum, as the Supreme Court decision allows them to do.

Dunning noted that Cambridge Citizens Opposed to Compulsory Fluoridation had raised $800 in Cambridge and gotten a contribution of over $10,000 from a group called the Massachusetts Citizens Rights Association. Inc. In contrast, he said, the Cambridge Citizens Committee for Dental Health, of which he was vice-chairman, received $4500 in local contributions.